ESSAY Exam For Offline Classes

Print Friendly, PDF & Email


I. Write an essay on the following topics in not more than 1500 Words 

  1. Mahatma Gandhi v/s Nehru v/s Sardar Patel – Whom would you choose as your PM if they were alive today? Explain why and why not.
  2. If you are given a ticket to contest Lok Sabha elections by the Aam Aadmi Party from New Delhi, would you contest leaving behind your IAS dream? Give a reasoned explanation.
  • insights we have to write any one of the given two topics?

    • Srinu

      Each topic carries 100 Marks – that means u have to write both

      • Srinu

        “Send both by 5 pm today”

    • Yes both.

      • sir just mailed you the two answers (essays) in word format…….hope they have reached u successfully……..sir by when marks would be revealed …….and can there be any conformation of successfully acceptance of my mail(answer) sent to u ???

  • sps

    thank u so much for including prelims 2 test series also…


    sir…..i have problem….may i write in hindi….plz allow…….

  • Insights

    In the first essay, Suppose I choose M.Gandhi and write about why I chose him. I am confused in the second part of the question, what do u mean by why and why not??????

    DO we have to explain why not I rejected Nehru or Patel ? Or only select one out of three for PM candidature.

    Kindly address soon

    • you should explain – why not others? why you rejected other two?

  • Thanku so much

  • Sir, am naive to these topics.Do you suggest me to write the essay with just a quick reading from the Internet ?

  • sir, any hint about 2nd question? isnt a hypocrite?

    • write honest opinion. You can write either for or against, no harm in it. Your views should be honest and straightforward, not to impress readers/examiners.

  • Datta

    Though I’m not in condition of joining your offline classes, I liked the essay topics you assigned particularly for screening the candidates.

  • amazing topics sir….esp the first one…too good 😀

  • Sir, if possible pls do post the best essay on dis site too.

  • Sumit Kumar Rai

    All the best people. The essays are really

  • rahul

    very nice topics sir……

  • vinay

    Are marks deducted for not writing up to the required word limit?

  • venkat

    when the results will be announced

  • sruthi.y

    sir am not getting 1500 words for the 2nd answer…… what to do

    • It’s ok. Write in as many words as you can. Content is important.

  • Pradeep

    Sir, Pl extend time till 10pm. I could write it b/w 7.30pm to 9.30pm & to scan it from a nearby computer center & send it to you before 10pm

  • Sir, i am thinking whether i can write these essays. Because i am planning to join second batch.

    • You should write. We are thinking of giving preference for the second batch to those who can’t make it this time.

  • insights , what if word limit is less?

    • Don’t worry about word limit. You should not exceed 1500.

  • should we submit the essays in a single word doc or separate doc for each?

  • JSB

    can all those who have wrote essay expect a feedback also?? on their respective mails.. i m first time writer over here. datsy want to have ur views ..thanks!!

    • We will do our best to give feedback on your essay.

  • rajeevpratapsingh85

    Sir Can I get one hour more .. I am in office and hardly got time to right the essay

    • Rukhsana

      Oh Gosh just now got to know that you extend the time till 10 P.M, due to paucity of time I wrote in hurry and sent you the scanned copies from my office…well…no problem withing time limit at least I could send my essays..but have little apprehensions about the essay whether it would be considerable or not….ha ha….I am happy that I wrote my first essay ….

      • Rukhsana

        Dear the same happened to me as well 🙂 I didnt even structure it, wrote directly. Not to mention that it was ma first essay too. 🙂

        But I have realized my bottlenecks now, especially essays. 🙁
        I have to work like hell

        • One of the intentions of conducting the essay test was to break the inhibition and let aspirants assess themselves where they stand. Glad that it met its objectives.

          All the best Tauseef! 🙂

  • I will finish the both the essay by 6:00 PM

  • Insights, i started writing essays only after seeing your response. I hope you will consider my essays, if at all i am late for an hour or so.

  • Siddhesh

    finally for the first time i have written essay now i will hope for the best and may the best people get selected.

  • wanderer

    Sir, scanned essays need to be sent in which format?

  • mailed, thanks Insight.

    Best wishes that u wud make Super-40 of Civil services soon, similar to Super-30 of IIT.

  • muni85

    I have written my first essay for the first time.

    Sir,please go through essays i have written and provide me an opportunity to join your institute only if i deserve it.

    Meanwhile when can we expect this exam results?

    • dr NAVEEN

      sir i have sent but in haste can i make change in some paragraph as you have extended the time limit

      • Ya also please send all attachments in one single mail 🙂

    • May be 3-4 days. Lots of entries.

  • insights i’ve mailed my essay to u , please give me review if possible as this was first time i wrote essay .


    MY…BAD scanner is not working today… i written before 4,not able to upload…what should i do…bro no camera…

    • dr NAVEEN

      bro sir has extended the time limit to 10 pm in between type and send

  • sruthi y

    @ insights.., i’ve mailed my essays, can i get any confirmation mail.?

    • it is received.


      just check sent mails and confirm our id. We have received more than 100 entries, so not possible to send acknowledgements to everyone. Thank you.

  • Insights

    I mailed my copy in haste as I was running out of time. No scanning facility was available and i had to rush here and there. Please check ur mail and tell me whether i need to send it with rearrangements?

  • sujit

    sir, in the form where you have asked for the number of attempts and number of time given mains, i was not getting zero in the drop down hence it came 1 in both the options where it should have been 0 as i have not attempted yet, what will it be considered ??

    • It doesn’t matter. It is ok.

  • mansi

    sir. gave wrong details in the form in a hurry.resubmitted it again. please consider that sir.

  • Sir, couldn’t read your comment that you extended the time to 10 pm,as I had some work +naive to the topic,I just wrote essay of 600-700 words,suggest If I have to re work on my willing to do that.and would mail the modified one before 10 pm
    ~ thanx

    • Extension is for working aspirants. We are not looking at word limit. If you are satisfied with content, no need to send another.

  • NS

    @ Insights-
    Sir, have send u the mail, written for the first time, kindly consider the same.

  • Insights, i actually hail from Karnataka but i guess by mistakenly i selected Kerala as my state.

  • Srinu

    HI manu…where r u?
    have u written essay today?

  • Aditi

    Shit…..when was time extended…..I wrote dem in haste in 2 hrs cuz of tym limit as I started at 3 cuz of some odr commitments….this is nt done….:(:(

  • Sir please kindly confirm essay received to you from [email protected]…. I have sent 3 emails to you. First file was greater than 25mb though sent to you via google drive( 5:19pm, as the scanner I borrowed from friend not worked I captured images by mobile). But in case you can’t open it I have sent 2 essays separately with subject essay1(5:27 pm) and essay2(5:40pm).

  • Srinu

    Now competition over…
    friends please comment…and send ur essays
    My first Essay
    Mahatma Gandhi v/s Nehru v/s Sardar Patel – Whom would you choose as your PM if they were alive today? Explain why and why not.
    The prime minister is the chief of government; he leads the nation. His ideologies and thoughts are very much important and impact the nation at large. The person who aspires to become PM should not only have constitutionally mentioned qualifications but also good understanding of nation’s culture and its diversity.
    Nehru as PM
    Nehru is considered to be the architect of the modern Indian nation-state; a sovereign, socialist, secular, and democratic republic. Jawaharlal Nehru had very good thoughts. Peaceful co-existence and non-alignment are his views. He considered humanity as his god and social service as his religion. He realized that doing a thing by the right means would lead to good results. He believed in science and glorified its achievements. Even more than what he said and wrote, it was his personality and the way he lived and interacted with his fellow human being that constituted his greatest contribution to India.
    Nehru’s achievements were many, as were his failures. For good or bad, however, his foundations shaped the India we see today. The fact that a Pandit (JL Nehru) was the prime minister made Kashmir state different from the other 500 princely states. Despite nehru’s love for great principles his incapacity to take decisions in time and his inability to work with colleagues like Patel was responsible for the present day Kashmir issue which is yet to solve. The disparity between the rich and the poor, the conspicuous consumption habits of the Indian elite, the spreading culture of waste, the depredation of the forests, all growing out of Nehru’s schemes, his blind faith in the western-socialist model of industrialization and central-planning.
    Patel as PM
    Sardar Patel was an Indian barrister and statesman, one of the leaders of the Indian National Congress and one of the founding fathers of the Republic of India. He was a social leader who played a leading role in the country’s struggle for independence and guided its integration into a united, independent nation.
    During his lifetime, Vallabhbhai Patel received criticism of an alleged bias against Muslims during the time of partition. India is diverse country and the concept of secularism is very important for the growth and welfare of the nation. His communal and aggressive nature does not suit present day India.
    Gandhi as PM
    Mahatma Gandhi is a firm believer in truth and non-violence. In Gandhi’s view speaking harsh and bad of others were also considered to be non-violence. This is relevant to the any society at any part of the time. If everyone follows it at least to a possible extent it can decrease many of crimes that we are seeing today. Non-violence is a sign of progress. It leads to good will and love towards all that is very much required in this diverse country.
    He had faith that keeping more than required is stealing. This stealing is actually responsible for much chaos in our society like corruption and inequality. If many of us follow this, there is no doubt why we cannot achieve socialism ie less difference between haves and have not’s.
    He has of the view that religion is the basis of morality and morality should be the guiding factor of politics. Observance of untouchability, even today is the sign of lack of morality in religion. Hinduism without untouchability can deliver a definitive message to the world. Untouchablity is a poison eating the vitals of Hinduism. It is inhuman. He has given more importance to moral values in education than the literary training. This is needed for our youth empowerment.
    Gandhi always aimed for self-sufficient villages; wished for balanced and decentralized economy. His experiment in simple living and high thinking is one of his greatest contributions. He believed that with simple living the resources of the planet earth can sustain us comfortably and his famous saying that earth provides us enough for our needs but not for our greed is extremely apt today. He insisted on the inclusive growth of society and rural development. This is our aim today inclusive and sustainable growth.
    His concept of giving back something to the society is much related today. Happiness cannot be obtained from money alone. It comes when there is some meaning to the life. This is the direction and will that our leadership need today to make life of poor people better.
    Gandhi was a great leader not only because he is charismatic but also because he lived and died for his principles; he never compromised on his principles. He had almost everything required to be a successful leader. By saying this, there remains no doubt that Mahatma Gandhi is my choice for PM for present day India.

    • “Despite nehru’s love for great principles his incapacity to take decisions in time and his inability to work with colleagues like Patel was responsible for the present day Kashmir issue which is yet to solve.”………In my opinion it seems too harsh, i believe we sud avoid this kind of words.

      • Srinu

        Thank u Mukul, i will follow from now…

      • Nikhil D

        Hi Srinu, please find my comments after reading your essay. While concluding essay, it looks biased towards your emotion rather than facts. Another factor is you could have thrown some light on issues/problems of 1947 and current issues and how the personality would have tackled it today. And if tackled, how successful it would have been today. For instance, Foreign policy plays a crucial role in nation’s development today. So, Nehru, a strong advocate of foreign relations would have been better than Gandhiji, who believed in indigenous development. I mean, current issues and how the personality would have dealt with it today would have given your efforts more firm base. If we talk about civil society, Anna Hazare could be compared with Gandhiji for creating mass mobility and thus a biased conclusion on facts could be made, rather than emotional one (like you have done while chosing Gandhiji for his principles)

        Language and flow is excellent.
        All in all, a very well constructed essay 🙂

        • Srinu

          Thank u for ur comments

  • Ashim

    insights, i hv sent both the essays in two diff. mails….shall i send both in single mail again or will u manage?

    • It would be nice if you can send in a single mail.

      • Ashim

        oki…i hv sent both the essays in a single mail nw..

  • jazz

    Mahatma Gandhi v/s Nehru v/s Sardar Patel
    “ Every Indian dreams of a nation of social equality among all the people and economic prosperity”. With this vision, role of democracy becomes imperative in accomplishing this dream and hence, selection of Prime Minister who is the head of the union, is of utmost importance for smooth functioning of the government.
    The selection process for this prestigious post depends on the voting power by the people. So, a rational and pragmatic approach by the public is utterly required and the need to realise the power of each and single vote , which would decide the future of the nation and immensely , in general of the people.
    With the Lok Sabha 2014 elections approaching for the post of Prime Minister, in my view Sardar Patel would be the best option, had he been alive today for such a demanding post. The reason being attributed to role played by him in India’s freedom struggle. The main qualities which must be present in prime ministerial candidate comprises of love for the nation, secular nature, broad mindedness, willingness to do anything for the country, compassion for the poor , along with the courage to stand against any kind of tolerance and maintaining one’s integrity. With this picture in mind, Sardar Patel fits best within the framework of Prime Minister post. Famous with the tag of ‘ Iron Man of India’ and being recognised as fierce nationalist, with his philosophy of ‘ nation first attitude’ and his decisive action of merging Hyderabad into India and his ability to resolve Kashmir issue due to his pragmatic nature makes him appropriate and deserving .
    His belief in social equality as can be seen under articles 29 and 30, which recognizes protection and privileges given to the minorities in the Indian Constitution , owe much to the vigilance of Patel and shows his concern toward the marginalised society.
    At present , though our nation has gone far with the recent advancements in science and technology and with the rise in GDP, we are prospering economically too. But, still there are some intrinsic problems based on caste, religion, race , social inequality, poverty, illiteracy , lack of healthcare services and the marginalised society which are being ignored as the nation is developing. For which there is utmost need to address these issues to fully reap the benefits of our developing economy , so that nobody is left behind.
    There is a need of good leader who could realise all these problems which are holding our nation backward , who with the use of his intellect ; courage ; determination would take these concerns forward while maintaining his integrity.
    As Sardar Patel possess all these qualities, is capable of making a nation which every Indian dreams of. So, he deserves to be the head of the Union.
    In contrast , I don’t think Mahatma Gandhi and Nehru to be suitable for Prime Minister post. The foremost reason being they were not secular, Nehru opposed integration of Hyderabad into India. They had some sort of communal nature and it was their conspiracy which led to death penalty for Bhagat Singh and his friends. They do not have far sightedness as compared to Patel. In a nutshell, they can’t be considered as good leaders for the progress of the nation.

    • Srinu

      Good essay..but Gandhi communal? he did not have far sightedness?? need to analyse

      • kalyani

        good one. But I didnt know about Nehru’s attitude in Hyderabad issue

      • jazz

        thanks srinu for reviewing. i’ll keep ur suggestion in my mind

    With the ongoing tussle between national political parties of India since independence , major being Indian National Congress and BJP and some other minor parties, the introduction of AAP which was formed last year in November, led by Arvind Kejriwal has given a new hope to all the citizens who dream of corruption free and equal status for all India.
    The results of recent elections in Delhi where AAP too was competing against Congress and BJP, clearly indicates the willingness of the people to have clean, transparent and honest government so as to raise their standard of living by means of good governance.
    AAP giving strong competition to both the parties and people’s faith in them accrue to the fact, of their determination and dedication to make everything transparent, also the selection of candidates based on the values of integrity, loyalty, no criminal background and not getting corrupted at any cost.
    Joining AAP will be considered as dignitarian as it has the potential in bringing a change in the long stalled condition of the nation. AAP comprises of maximum youth candidates which are considered to be the future assets of our nation , with tremendous amount of courage and vision of creating a nation devoid of corruption and promoting social equality.
    It would be a great privilege for me If I am given a chance of contesting Lok sabha elections , while I am preparing for IAS , I would accept this invitation for contesting, keeping aside my dream for the time being, in a hope of betterment of the nation.
    The reason accords to the present scenario, where political parties have more power than the bureaucrats, though as per law civil servants should possess more power, but due to intervention of corruption in every field, it becomes difficult for the bureaucrats to sail through the water with the presence of sharks. Though, law have been made to protect civil servants from the hands of corrupted leaders, but rarely is the chance of its strict implementation.
    Owing to the present scenario, where political parties contain more power, it becomes imperative to change the government. To bring more transparency and accountability in all the processes of the government, there is need for good governance which can only come through the overtaking of corrupted political parties by AAP. So, that there could be strict implementation of all the laws and abiding of the provisions laid down by constitution.
    As can be seen for suspension of Durga Nagpal by Chief Minister, though having no reason for this suspension, Ashok Gehlot case clearly indicates the overreach of these political parties.
    If the ruling party maintains their integrity , then there would be more stricter implementation of the laws, increased cooperation among bureaucrats and political leaders, which would indirectly benefit the nation.
    In a nutshell, role played by civil servants and bureaucrats is equally important for the overall development of the nation. But, the need of the hour is to have clean government for the progress of the nation.

    • jasneet92

      I think it should be Ashok khemka 🙂 in place of Gehlot.
      I also feel that mentioning name of any individual or party should be avoided.

      • tauseef, u r right it shuld be khemka:P. thanks for reviewing. will surely follow ur advice of not mentioning any name of individual. but regarding party , i guess there was a need to mention about the party acc. to the topic. don’t u think so?

  • jazz

    friends, pls post ur essays too so that we can review each other’s

  • muni85

    hi insights,
    It seems lot of people have written the first essay referring wiki and other online sources! i dont know how you people will be able to recognize the real talent among the freshers….


    GUYs how to check word length? send me link to check word length

    • type in ms word yaar…u will get the total words used 🙂

      • sanjay

        @tauseef ahmad’
        connectors are counted in words or not?I’ve a confusion regarding this.

  • sujit

    If you are given a ticket to contest Lok Sabha elections by the Aam Aadmi Party from New Delhi, would you contest leaving behind your IAS dream? Give a reasoned explanation.
    My motivation behind being an IAS aspirant is SERVICE to the vulnerables, the marginalised and the despair ones, at the grass root level. The major problem lies not with the policies but the implementation of policies. Cleansing the Indian politics of the corrupt (AAP agenda) is obviously required but, designing of policies or flagship programs by any govt (NDA/UPA), are good looking on paper. Still they fail in their objectives, the reason is faulty implementation due to inefficient bureaucracy. The service of correct implementation of the policies and adhering to the grievances of the needy at the lower levels is what I aspire for, therefore will choose to be an IAS over being an MP.
    Hardly any policy succeeds due to faulty implementation. The present requirement of the country is an overhaul of public administration, a change in the mind-set of the bureaucracy. The attempts to reform the bureaucracy have also been ineffective as it is a power centre in its own rights, therefore it is only up to the bureaucrats, esp. the new recruits, with a new mind set, to increase the efficiency of bureaucracy and ensure proper implementation of the policies.
    Proper implementation of a policy means that most of the people for whom the policy has been targeted, do get the benefit of the policy. This requires good work at the grass root level. Which is the direct responsibility of SDM or district collector and not of an MP or MLA. Therefore as I aspire to bring good services to people, I will choose to be an IAS officer. Being a legislature will not only take the chances to work at the grass root level, but also demands a lot of factor even to aspire to become one.
    Just by looking at the contestants of the AAP we can find it. They are people who have spent a lot of time in public domain. They are supreme court advocates, national journalists, social rights activists, social servants, former civil servants, basically people who have worked at the grass root level and know the system very well and are popular enough to deserve a vidhan sabha or lok sabha ticket. It would be a waste of a ticket if I get one now. There are people like me who support and volunteer the party movements but certainly don’t contest election. Therefore I would prefer being an IAS aspirant and try to play my part to the best of my abilities, to deal with the problem of honest policy implementation and grass root level service to the people.

    • Srinu

      Good thoughts…good essay

  • sujit

    Mahatma Gandhi v/s Nehru v/s Sardar Patel – Whom would you choose as your PM if they were alive today? Explain why and why not.

    Lack the political will is the major problem India is facing today. Political will is required to bring essential structural changes to move parallel with changing expectation of people and time. To get rid of the archaic rules and reform according to the increasing complexity, strong will power is required. A man strong enough to deal with the increasing complexities and expectation has to be Sardar Vallbhbhai Patel. Mahatma Gandhi’s philosophy well against the oppression of the Indian masses at the hands of the British, was adequate for the well being of people but not enough to run a country. Nehru, did manage to make India a moral super power but the series of mistakes he made in his whole tenure as PM, declines him as a PM today.
    Diversity, has become the identity of India and Indian population today. It’s a beautiful word, which shows different colour, culture, language all in the same platter. It was not the same 70 years ago, the diversity today, was fragmentation those days. So fragile, that a slightest push could lead into disintegration of a great nation into fragments. It was the efforts of one man, who with his iron will and fearless attitude built the diverse and united country, we inherit today.
    The vision of Sardar Patel can be seen in his iconic decision to strengthen the Imperial Civil Services, to build the strong steel frame for united India. This bridge of faith between the nationalist leaders and the civil servants worked very well when the British left not only India and Pakistan but also more than 600 princely states independent.
    Patel showed exemplary political sagacity in dealing with complex situations where the princely states were reluctant on joining the union. He assured them of non supremacy by the state departments and tackled all the questions of princely states with great diplomatic sense. A sense India has been missing since a long time. Therefore the “Iron Man of India” will be a perfect Prime Minister today
    Patel as an ardent follower of Mahatma Gandhi and supporter of his philosophy, completed the Herculean task of uniting India without shedding a drop of blood, in a non-violent diplomatic way. But Gandhi’s philosophy of Non-violence, human freedom, equality and justice make him a great humanitarian but not a dynamic political leader. His idea for economics based on simple living and self-sustainability is unviable in the present globalised economic scenario. Khadi cannot possibly be the answer to the trade deficit we face today.
    Mahatma Gandhi will definitely be a misfit for India’s Prime Minister today as he was in 1947. But Gandhiji’s disciple, Jawaharlal Nehru became the first Prime of India in 1947. The nationalistic zeal in him and the way he led the country took us to a moral height, but the bunch of mistakes he has made in his tenure depicts his myopic vision.
    Nehru was the most internationally famed Indian after Gandhi in the colonial times. Despite Nehru’s reiteration to be non-aligned to any of the super powers, Nehru’s disregard for capitalism made America perceive India as a pro-USSR country.
    Nehru way too impressed by USSR’s social levelling, electoral democracy and free press, he was also impressed by Lenin as he was unaware for his intolerance. Such falling for USSR was contradictory to the India’s claim of non alignment. Nehru criticized the Brithish and the French when they invaded Egypt during suez canal crisis but didn’t utter a word when USSR rolled their tanks into Budapest. This resulted in hampered credibility it the international avenue. Nehru’s blind faith for Krishna Menon, just for his academic certification, led to many embarrassment for the country like the defeat in indo china war.
    Mao Zedong of easily disguised his intention from Nehru and his man KM Panniker. Despite Sardar Patel’s warning Nehru trusted the Chinese and failed to detect their ambition.
    Nehru was also unable to handle the reorganisation of states on linguistic basis. His inability led to Sriramulu’s Satyagraha, violence in Andhra region and violent tussle for Bombay between Maharashtra and state of Bombay. Finally the masses won to get their demanded states and Nehru face humiliation.
    Nehru’s attempt to strengthen the industrial sector without strengthen the agrarian sector led to food insecurity in the country. His attempt to tackle landlessness in the form of land reforms failed in majority of the country. Inequality and landlessness persisted. Nehruvian economics which was designed to make the country self reliant, made the market uncompetitive and later brought the country to the edge of bankruptcy.
    Nehru proposed the Hindu civil code bill which brought discontent not only masses but also among the top political leaders like Dr. Rajendra Prasad. This showed Nehru’s inability to deal with sensible issues. India still regrets Nehru’s decision to take matters to UN when Pakistan invade parts of Kashmir, which led to seize fire and losing the area under POK to Pakistan. Despite his nationalistic views, the short sightedness shown by Nehru in his tenure as PM, his habit to impose his ideology on the national issues and his disregard for democratic way of decision making makes me not to choose him as the Indian Prime Minister today.

    • Srinu

      Good knowledge…u have written more about Nehru than Patel though Patel was ur PM candidate!

      • sujit

        thanx for reading Srinu. ya, Nehru played PM for 17 yrs and generated lot of data against Gandhiji’s perception…

    • try to relate weakness and strength of these leaders with today’s world, emphasis how relevant or irrelevant are their principles/style of working in tackling challenges which India faces today.

      By the way, for lighter node……. bhai, Nehru se koi personal problem to nahin hai? 🙂

      • sujit

        i think we were also asked the reasons for rejecting other two…

        • thats what I am saying, once u will prove their irrelavance in contemporary times, then only u can reject 2 out of 3.

  • Hello Sir ,
    Please conform that you received my both the essay on time.
    Email ID : [email protected]
    I send my Essay before 10:00 PM .
    Regards ,
    Rajeev Pratap Singh,Bangalore


    If you are given a ticket to contest Lok Sabha elections by the Aam Aadmi Party from New Delhi, would you contest leaving behind your IAS dream? Give a reasoned explanation.

    AAAM AADMI PARTY(Common Man’s Party) is a new hope to the people of India who are looking for a clean governance, free from corruption, high command Party culture, nepotism, Dirty nexus between politician-Mafia goons- Corrupt bureaucrats- some unethical business groups. The origin of party lies in Social mass movement against Corruption led by Social Activist Anna Hazare. Philosophy of AAP is to bring back the Power of decision making in Governance, to Common People. i.e. SWARAJ as dreamed by GANDHIJI. In line with Swaraj, other agendas of the party to implement Right to Reject & Right to recall, so that Democracy does not limit itself just to Come out and vote once in 5 year.

    Bringing true Swaraj is not just the dream of AAP but also of millions of common People in India, including me. So now coming to the question whether I should join AAP or continue toward my dream of becoming IAS, first I have to analyze over why I want to become IAS officer at all. What advantages/disadvantages to the PEOPLE in choosing either way by me. I have to critically analyze politics vs. Administration, way of their working, strengths and weakness of both.

    Firstly, Yes, the Philosophy of AAP is just reconciled with my dream of becoming IAS, and contributing my effort to bring a clean, responsive and welfare government to serve the people of India so that India can realize its true potential. Now the next question is via which way. Both ways have to be analyzed critically before coming to my final answer.

    Politics is an art of articulating people’s demand, resolving conflict between different interest group & consensus building. Politics is basically a Science of analyzing the problems of the society and art of solving them. Politics is not just being winning support of your own interest group, becoming famous in your area, fighting election and just winning 1 more seat for your party as happened in India till now. Here I want to emphasize the difference between traditional way of politics and politics as dreamed by AAP. Doing politics via traditional way is very easy, because corruption is not just self supporting but self expanding. All you have to do favour a return to the group who supported you to win election.

    But doing a clean Scientific way of politics, which is really benefit to all different section of Society is very difficult, especially in a country like ours. New challenges from Globalization, climate change, Sustainability of ecology and environment has to be well understood by politicians. For me Politics is not just articulating People’s view and making some policy according to their demand, but also creating awareness in general masses about both long term and short term consequences of any decision affecting their life. For this you must understand the nitty gitty of Governance. How practical is any policy announced by political leaders. For this I must say your past experience in working toward good governance counts.

    Without any experience, without knowing the complexities of the problems of such diverse society, without aiming the long term vision of a nation just joining politics on the bases of popular support via fault finding the opponent will not be sustainable. Either the popular support will die down with passage of time as people will realize that you are not able to solve their problems or the party has to come back to the traditional way of politics, joining hand with culprits to sustain themselves. In both situation there is loss to nation, loss to the democracy which saw a ray of hope from AAM AADMI PARTY.

    The vision of AAP, which led to me toward thinking about joining Politics over IAS, also depends on able Administration. If support from inside the system itself is weak then even the existence of AAP can come to threat. It is the responsive bureaucracy which can realize the dream of AAP and bring True Swaraj in India. For example any law which is passed has a good intension behind it. No law itself is bad. It is the implementer who makes the Policy successful or bad. Case being the law of land ceiling was introduced for the benefits of public, but it was lack of enthusiasm in bureaucracy, nexus between interest groups and bureaucracy which led to the failure of a well intended scheme. Corruption in India is not just due to crooked people who enters into politics but also due to pliable officer, who does not able to stand upright against evil either due to not willingness considering them a family man/woman or due to their incompetence to fight against the mighty system.

    Any well intended law can be abused by the vested interest to threat even the existence of that law if your administration is not strong and responsive to the challenge.
    Case being the frivolous request of information via RTI act, make the politician to think about amending it to save crumbling of Administrative system. So a responsive, innovative, change adaptive and evolving bureaucracy can only determine the success of any political Government. And yes for that you also need support of same politician who are against whistleblower act. So the solution of problem lies in AWARENESS of the general Public, which can put pressure on political establishment here comes the huge responsibility on the civil society and media.

    Retired bureaucrats, professionals like lawyers, journalists, social scientists forming a number of well informed civil society groups which can create mass awareness. Our country needs a vibrant civil society which can control as well as guide both administration and political parties.

    So after analyzing strength and weakness of both the paths, situation prevailing in the society as well as in considering the future challenges, if you ask me whether I should Join AAP right now at the cost of my dream of becoming IAS, I would say NO. Because there is no guarantee that system you created with the help of popular support once, will be able to sustain for longer. Moreover, the hand on experiences you gain via being an insider of system for some time can give you a great opportunity later in life to do well for betterment of nation. Yes you can support voluntarily via spreading the philosophy of AAP, but joining politics and supporting it from outside, both are different. You can join politics later also with great experiences and insights but cannot become IAS after age of 30 (Gen candidate). You can take part in political movement for a cause like supporting a NGO while in service or after retirement or you can even leave the service say after 15-20 year of Experience. Best solution according to me is liberalizing the Political activities of civil servants to take part in politics like France. Because I believe neutrality of civil service is already a myth specially in a diverse country like ours.

    Mahatma Gandhi v/s Nehru v/s Sardar Patel – Whom would you choose as your PM if they were alive today? Explain why and why not.

    To answer this question, first we have to analyze the role of PM in our country, challenges before a PM in the prevailing time, vision of nation, personality of PM, qualities which can help him to realize these complex problems.
    So coming to the role of PM, he is the spokesperson of India in this globalized world. He is linking pin of the wheel moving toward the betterment of nation. He role is coordinating different ministry, different alliances specially in the coalition era. He is not just the leader of Majority party but also leader of ALLIANCE group. Responsibility of providing a stable decisive government lies on his shoulders. Flexibility, assertiveness, clear communication, co-ordination, acceptability and decisiveness are the key abilities an INDIAN PM should have.

    Now if we analyze life of Mahatma Gandhi, we will see many of the above said qualities he possessed. He was a able communicator being the spokesperson of INC for many years, quite clear and decisiveness his ideas like Swadeshi, non violent movement, Civil disobedience. Acceptable to large section of Society. Assertiveness in his decision like taking back civil disobedience movement after choura-chouri incident. And also flexible being ardent opposer to the separate electorate but showing flexibility via Poona pact with Ambedkar and allowing reservation for depressed classes.
    His view about self sufficient village is also commendable. Which in a true sense can bring SWARAJ , absent of any oppressive capitalistic class. His view of capitalism was based on trusteeship, not just Profit making via using others labor. His Idea are The Great to bring back the Ram Rajya, but problem is with the prevailing situation of the country in the context of whole world. You can not remain secure in this world via not being industrialized; not keeping defence forces, just being self sufficient village will not be able to save the nation from Neo- colonialism. The problem with Swaraj is that U alone can not bring Swaraj in a single state or nation. It will come only when the whole world will realize its need and importance, and yes it is coming little by little by different names like participatory govt, sustainability, green energy, need not greed.

    Now coming to Jawaharlal Nehru, he was an excellent orator. More supporter of Industrialized India, in the wake of the prevailing condition of country like massive unemployment, lack of technology, problem of food shortage for huge population, health needs, science and technological needs of a nation. His ideas of Foreign Policy still influence the diplomats all over the world. Panchsheel, NAM concept are still play a big role in Indian Foreign policy. Are still as much as relevant as 60 years back. Supporting technology via opening IITs, IISc, Agriculture universities, CSIR, BHAKRA Dam, and much other great contribution by him which led to self sufficiency Toward food grains need of this country. Only thing not good about Nehru was his elitist nature. He was much a representative of India not Bharat. His critic on bureaucracy without giving any other alternative was not an intellectual answer. Sustaining power seems to be more important for him, example being either Accepting the Position of PM or no position in any ministry at all.

    Sardar Patel, Iron man of India. the Nation we are proud today being the largest democracy in the world, the most diverse nation in all aspect, class-caste, ethnic, religion has been possible with contribution of this great man. Uniting 562 princely nation at the time of Independence just after the already division of country into 2 parts was not just a small feat. People, who say that he was the Bismarck of India, seemingly forget that the challenge he faced was much more than faced by Bismarck.
    The most admirable characteristic of this person was that he was a true nationalist. Not being power craziness, he knew he can contribute to the nation even not being the PM. His flexibilities and assertiveness can both be seen in uniting 562 princely states via using all methods like Friendly advice, fear of security, princely purses, and autonomy to states, separate lists for state in 7th schedule of constitution.
    His flexibility and decisiveness can also be shown by this incident, In spite of ardent non believer of separate constitution for J&K, when in the absence of Nehru in the country he has to take call of the threat posed by Maharaja of J&K, he supported article 370 just for the betterment of the people of that state via providing some special privileges in administrative and legislative flexibility to suit the needs of particular state.
    His idea of ALL INDIA SERVICE was best idea of that time to unite nation in a single unitary feature. It was the most practical solution to improve the relation between states and Union. His idea of outsider of states being appointed to the key position of administration was also worth mentioning.

    So after analyzing both the prevailing needs and complexities of today’s INDIA as well as the personalities of our great leaders, if I have to answer whom I would like to see the PM of India in today’s time, my answer would be MAHATMA GANDHI.
    Reasoned being his evolving and accommodative style of leadership. His life is a MESSAGE. Starting with pure vaishnav, even rejecting milk-considering it non vegetarian. Not taking allopathic medicine considering them as un-natural..against the order of nature. Later accommodating his views with scientific facts and validation of their usefulness. This shows his leadership style was also evolving. Taking back a successful movement after choura-chouri incident was not just only accordance with his principle but also estimating the people’s enthusiasm toward mass movement. He knew mass movement can’t sustain for long. People start losing hope after some time and after oppressive treatment by Police, so it was better to take back movement from its good time so that Hope of People that movement was not unsuccessful remain alive and that hope can again be galvanized in future with much greater force next time.
    His idea of non violent also shaped with time, he knew fighting against mighty force with violent ways can be suicidal for normal public. His shrewdly force the Britishers to show their true face. Like Breaking of Salt law was just a small step, but Britishers felt helpless by his move, Neither they can take Strict action against just a small violation of law, neither they can sit silently, because it was a challenge to British Govt. by AAM AADMI. Normal People started breaking inhuman law, rejecting foreign clothes and readymade material which was the root motive of British raj in India.
    Moving from non co-operation to civil disobedience then Quit India movement showing his idea of evolving non violence.
    Basically What I want to say that no particular leadership style can be great in all situation. Leadership is also context dependent. So any leader who evolves with time is a great leader in all TIME….An evolving leader can take challenge of all new complexities of coming future also. Because today you don’t have limitation of expertise in any field. All you have to accommodate great ideas into a cohesive manner.
    This was THE most important characteristics of GANDHIJI.

    • Hey Nitin, You rightly focussed on present day AAP party and its agendas without looking too much into its future and more importantly looking at it as another political party and gave good reasons to pursue your dream over politics.
      But, one negative point which I felt is, you spoke about leaving service after 15-20 years. In my opinion your dream IAS (which I think is not just becoming IAS but also to do civil service) is fulfilled only if you are fully committed to it throughout your journey and not leaving it mid-way no matter what. So, in this case your choice to pursue your Dream doesn’t appear fully convincing to me or may be there is a different way to look at it 🙂

      I too am learning a lot from all these essays. Thanks for posting.
      All the best!

      • NITIN

        Firstly thanks Prashanth for review…….
        yes ur last line say it all …..i.e. different way of looking…
        Just Becoming IAS for the sake of getting a secure job is not my dream, serving the nation is my dream, IAS is just a platform and best platform for a middle class, average intelligent person like me to serve this nation…

        and i never looked AAP as just another political party….in essay itself I mention that they are quite different from others not doing traditional way of politics, but still AAP iteself need able administrator to prove them-self correct…

    • rs5000month

      Hello Nitin,
      I’m just a fledgling, so whatever criticism I will write are just my personal views on your essay and not an expert opinion. You are free to criticize me back, and try to explain but don’t take in negative sense, whatever I’m going to write below.
      What I think, is that paragraph 2 and 3 are similar and repetition of same points. Plus, instead of explaining what you are going to explain, you can directly start explaining those points.
      Also, you can work on grammar. Breaking your longer sentences into short ones will help one to understand better, what you want to express. Also, you use “CAPITAL WORDS” more frequently than needed. Better use double quote, instead of capital words. Other, than this, essay is not having a continuous flow. Some points come, then you talk about something totally different, and then those points again reappear. So, maintaining the flow is also important.
      3 stars from my side on your first essay.

    • rs5000month

      Regarding second essay, I was really enjoying reading it. Points were good, and I knew many of them but couldn’t write them in my essay. Except grammatical mistakes, flow as also good. You started again in your introduction, explaining what you are going to write, in next 2 paragraphs.So, introduction part can be modified. After that you explained M Gandhi, Nehru and Patel,but all of sudden, when you choose Mahatma Gandhi, that came as a shock to me.
      From, your own writings anyone can infer that you have more valid points for Patel to make him PM.
      Then in this essay, you just wrote, that prevailing complexities of today’s world, but you never mentioned what are those complexities. Points such as non-veg, Vashnovite, considering allopathic medicine against order of nature etc. should not be included as they have more personal touch, and are a bit negative also. A considerable population is consuming meat, a lot of people don’t follow vashno, and allopathic is presently largest segment of our medical industry.
      You told that Mahatma Gandhi took, his mass movement, because he thought that people lack interest after a certain time, and due to repressive measure adopted by police. This is again a blunder. He took back, the movement because, he was against violence, and in chauri-chaura, a violent mob set fire a police station, which resulted in death of police personnel. So, he withdrew the movement, even when it was at its peak and hugely successful in nature and effect.
      Then, you choose Gandhi as PM, but you only told what he did in past. You never told what are present situation problems and how Gandhi would have solved better those problems than Nehru and Patel. Comparison between these three is also missing.
      So, after accessing whole essay, 2 stars from my side for your second essay. Please don’t mine as I already explained these are not expert views and they could entirely differ from what I wrote. Criticism is always welcome.

      • NITIN

        I appreciate ur views….actually 2nd essay i just wrote in 1 n half hour, including mind-mapping n everything, just to send it before 5 pm as i was not knowing that time had been extended…I myself not satisfied from my essay……But happy that I wrote my first 2 essays..thanks brother…Really critically analyze……

  • Mahatma Gandhi v/s Nehru v/s Sardar Patel – Whom would you choose as your PM if they were alive today? Explain why and why not.

    Prime Minister of India is the most visible and important face in Indian political system. He is centre of decision making and head of govt in all practical senses. Head of govt always carry immense responsibility in every kind of polity whether it is dictatorship, presidential system or parliamentary system. This responsibility becomes all the more important in a diversified country like ours where different sections of people have entirely different demands, sometimes contradicting too. So to become PM of India demands certain qualities of administration to successfully tackle different problems. Mere stature of one’s personality may not be enough to be a PM.

    Even after 66 years of independence, it is still a hot debate topic that who should have been the PM of India Nehru or Patel. Though Gandhi never accepted any political position after the independence of India, still it is often discussed what could be results if Gandhi would have become PM of India.

    Often, answer of these debates is highly influenced by affinity with particular parties and misconceptions too esp. about Gandhi and Nehru. Though these great leaders struggled for India’s independence as a patriot, not just as Congress representatives, these leaders are often treated as property of particular parties.

    All three are highly admired leaders having different approaches towards society with the common aim of welfare of India. It is still relevant to discuss who among of these great leaders is best suited to become PM in today’s circumstances. Here we would try to analyse different aspects of their personality without being biased to our political affinity and misconceptions about them.

    In terms of their administrative qualities and development approach, we recognise these three leaders broadly as- Mahatma Gandhi for his Gram Swaraj model, Sardar Patel for integration of India and Nehru for socialistic approach of development and his influence on foreign policy of India.

    So if we compare today’s condition, there is focus on decentralization, devolution of power, empowerment at grass root, people participation in decision making across the world, in this sense Gandhi ji looks more relevant. 73rd and 74th amendment done to establish 3-tier local governance structure is based on Gandhian philosophy of decentralization only.

    At the same time, with the advent of globalization and increasing connected and interdependent world, foreign policy is becoming more and more important to maintain relationship with other countries and international organizations. Today every small-big decision is defined by global considerations and international organizations like WTO, UN and other regional or economic groups. It is his foreign policy’s vision Panchsheel and non-alignment because of which India could maintain its independent position during cold war period. Similarly no matter, how much we advocate on free market still growing inequality in the society makes the socialist policies essential. Here Nehru becomes relevant.

    On the other hand, there is growing separatist tendency in different parts of country on the basis of ethnicity, region, economic inequality, geographic conditions etc. Under these circumstances, integration skills of Sardar Patel seem to absolutely essential to maintain integrity, peace and harmony in country.
    Thus if we consider broadly only the core qualities of these leaders, no one can be said to be less relevant than others.

    Unlike Nehru and Patel, focus of Gandhi ji was more on spirituality. He believed in non-voilence, truthfulness, non-possessviness, self-discipline. His tools of protesting against evil like Satyagrah, fasting said to be outdated few years back. But people’s participation in Anna Hazare led India Against Corruption movement proved that Gandhi ji is still relevant. Mega success of movie based on Gandhi’s teachings like ‘Lage Raho MunnaBhai’ also shows, people still believe in success of non-voilence, truth.

    Gandhi’s passion to bring unprivileged section of society in mainstream can’t be undermined. Class divide on the basis of caste is still reality of our society. He explicitly focussed on education. He considered education as a tool of empowerment. Unlike today’s politicians who play reservation card and mobilize people on the basis of caste factor for their vote politics, Gandhiji looks much more relevant as he actually intented to bring them in main stream.

    Inspite of all these qualities, Gandhi ji had relatively less administrative experience compare to Patel and Nehru which seems to be quiet essential in today’s complex polity.

    Gandhiji had some kind of reluctance to use of technology. He was in favour of small scale manual labour based industries. But in these 66 years and specially in last two decades, technology has become inevitable part of our life. It does not seem to be practical to stay away from technology. With the globalised world, increasing population, growing consumerism, use of machines in production is absolutely essential to support the current lifestyle.

    Sardar Patel – ‘Iron man’ – is also one of the most admired personalities of our country. Thanks to him, because of which India is a sub-continent size country today. He showed his skills during Kheda Satyagrah and later when Congress contested for election after Govt of India 1935 act. And absolutely no doubt was left when he successfully integrated 562 princely states in India Republic. We need this kind of leader even today when we see insurgency in N-E states, separatists movement like Naxalism. Patel met with separatists with iron fists, unlike today when there is a growing feeling that separatists tendency, carelessness in law & order actually pays. These people are invited to be part of power rather than handling with tough decisions.

    Today our politicians treat bureaucracy as personal assistant with little scope for independent, impartial, neutral views. Patel was the man who clearly said to bureaucracy, if one can’t provide independent views, he should not become seceratary of his ministry. These kind of people with impeccable character are required in important constitutional positions today or even tomorrow. These principles can never be outdated.

    Nehru strived for humanism, secularism, socialism, progress of science, independence in international relations. Secularism is need of the day. With the rise of fundamentalist groups, one can clearly feel the polarization in Indian society based on religion. By secularization, he meant that no influence of religious factor in policy decisions. Any other consideration other than being human while treating citizens is offensive to democracy.

    Today progress science and technology is major factor which define the stature of a country in the world. More than man power, technology power like communication technology, satellite systems, expertism in cyber war etc decide the outcome of conflicts. Here Nehru deserves a special position. If he becomes PM today, our country may shift dependability from importing defense equipments and technology to self sufficiency by providing more inputs to R&D. Probably the moments like, when recently Bharat Ratan awardee eminent scientist C. N. R. Rao lightly mentioned in an interview ‘our politicians are idiots, they do not understand the value of science’, define how important the presence of Nehru can be today’s time.

    Presently whenever ISRO launches a satellite successfully, more than its features we debate about usefulness of spending money on it. Nehru can be very important in promoting scientific temper in society.

    Nehru was an eminent personality in international circles. He guided the whole foreign policy of India. Today we see, India lags in utilizing its diplomatic relations. Influence of regional parties and states is increasing in foreign policy matters like we noticed during water settlement with Bangladesh when CM of Bengal changed her mind in last moment, leading to embarrassment of country. In another instance, recently decision of PM participation in an international conference in Srilanka was influenced by Tamilnadu state politics. If Nehru becomes PM today, we would be successfully able to integrate the country and embarrassment in international circles can be avoided. In fact, India would be able to play more constructive role in international organization.

    Nehru gave utmost important to parliamentary process. He attended parliament session with great enthusiasm and gave respect to opposition too. This is much welcome need today considering the poor attendance, poor quality of debates, and less respect to opposition’s views. Character of parliament proceedings defines the quality of legislation and administration. One of the reasons of judicial activism is said to be apathy of our leadership, this can be tackled only if people like Nehru takes PM seat.

    On the economic front, though Nehru’s PSU based development model said to be failed but there is no doubt that PSUs played important role in India’s economic growth. And success-failure of PSUs should not be measured only in terms of monetary terms. It was the economic circumstances of that time which made socialist model essential. It would be incorrect to assume that Nehru would have been stucked on hard core socialist model even when whole world is feeling winds of LPG.

    Thus considering all the above facts, I would like to see Jawahar Lal Nehru as the PM of India today. Nehru has more acceptability in diversed social circles. However it does not mean that Gandhiji and Sardar Patel are incapable or less relevant in any way. They both are equally effective and much required in their own domain of expertise.

    If you are given a ticket to contest Lok Sabha elections by the Aam Aadmi Party from New Delhi, would you contest leaving behind your IAS dream? Give a reasoned explanation.

    Youth who do not take interest in politics are biggest culprit in failure of a country. Don’t forget it is the politics which define in which direction country will move. —— Chanakya
    Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) is the new kid in Indian political system but getting a lot of attention due to its untraditional way of politics or frankly speaking people oriented politics. It is founded by ex-civil servant Arvind Kejriwal aftermath of Lokpal movement led by Anna Hazare. Arvind Kejriwal has a proven track record of social service as he worked for RTI legislation, also got Raman Magsasay award for it. When all the tested methods of petitions, fasts failed, eventually no other path was left except to be part of political system to wipe out the corruption and criminalisation spread in politics.

    In fact, attitude of our politicians is so arrogant that they probably don’t even want to recognize demands of civil society. Rather than responding to demands of strong anti-corruption bill, politicians did their best to crush the movement and later challenged representatives of civil society to contest election and make law themselves. However after immense pressure from all corners of country, Parliament eventually passed ‘sense of house’ accepting demands of civil society for legislating strong Lokpal but eventually no action was taken. Under these circumstances a new political outfit Aam Aadmi Party was born.

    So foundation of AAP is based upon anti-corruption movement. Their recent success in Delhi assembly election reflects immense faith of people in AAP and erosion of credibility of established political parties.

    My journey of being an IAS and anti-corruption movement started almost together two years back. After working 4 years in IT industry, I realized something is missing in life, I must enhance ambit of my work environment. It cannot be purpose of my life to sit in a cubicle and communicating with unknown people using my computer through out my office hours. Though I managed to secure a comfortable life with fair salary but I could not remain ignorant and unresponsive to what is happening around me in the society. I cannot give a cold look to newspaper headings highlighting India’s failure of providing in basic amenities to our fellow countrymen.

    Eventually I started noticing the things more deeply, these shortcomings were translated to more refined terms IMR, MMR, HDI, inequality, birth rate, women safely, corruption, inefficiency, inclusive growth etc. More I dig deeper in various national and international reports, more I feel uncomfortable about the relatively poor condition of our country. I realized, in the name of highest, fastest, largest GDP growth, globalization, shining India, we are ignoring our larger population. We are dividing our country in India and Bharat.

    Similar to Aam Aadmi Party which came to politics as it became necessary to be part of system to clean the system, I decided to become part of system. Considering all my limitations that I am not super hero who can take horns with everyone, and it is not easy to survive in rotten system, I decided to prepare full time for Civil Services. Though like any other Indian, Bollywood is essential part of my life, I was in no illusion of changing everything the moment I become bureaucrat. But I knew very well that there is so much inefficiency in the system that even if an officer sitting in relatively higher responsible position does his duty well, without going out of his domain, he can impact thousands of life positively, or probably a million of people during his tenure.

    Politics is essential part of any country. Beauty of democracy is that inspite of being born in unprivileged conditions, a person can reach to top of political circle. There are many example when our leader came from very ordinary background and touched skies e.g. Sardar Patel, Lal Bahadur Shastri etc. Though we proudly claim to be the largest democracy of world, today the political reality of our country is entirely different from the theoretical principles of democracy. Honesty and integrity are no more cherished qualities to become a politician. High command culture is growing in almost every party. More than your integrity and leadership skills, it is more important whose son or daughter you are, how much money and muscle power you can manage, otherwise by the time one will make its presence felt in the party, he would be in his fifties.

    Under these circumstances, it is almost impossible to become part of political system for a person with humble background. So if someone still wants to leave larger impact on society another options are NGO or Civil Services. NGOs are again highly dependent on govt aids for their functioning. So for an individual, becoming part of civil services seems to be next good option. I followed the same path.

    But now with the arrival of Aam Aadmi Party, atmosphere of politics is different. AAP has established new standards in politics by following utmost transparency in funding, democratic procedure in candidate selection, staying away from tainted candidates, involving people in preparing manifestos. In fact, this has created so much pressure on established political parties that they have started talking about same and trying to imitate AAP, though half-heartedly. AAP has successfully mobilized the youth who till now had lost interest in politics and was more interested in planning to make a career abroad rather than talking about politics, forget about taking participation in active politics.

    But AAP has proved to be a game changer. It made the people realized that politics is not that bad, it is bad politicians that make it a touch-me-not thing. Profile of AAP candidates reflects that people from humble background are considering politics as career. In fact, a recently elected MLA of AAP Akhilesh Tripathi came to Delhi to prepare for civil services and end up joining AAP and later elected as an MLA.

    Success of AAP in Delhi has attracted lots of attention from all walks of life. In a short period of one year, AAP has proved that an election can be contested with white money and using fair means.

    Now option of joining politics other than joining bureaucracy is also open for youth including me. Here comes a question to me if it is OK to switch to politics as AAP’s Lok Sabha candidate leaving the IAS preparation in between.

    I can get a well defined career path if I become a bureaucrat. I can help in implementing various programs of govt and eventually will participate in policy framing. As I mentioned earlier also, govt plans in themselves are not at much fault, it is the poor implementation which leads to non-results. And if an officer does his job sincerely, he can impact countless lives positively.

    Joining a political party and contesting an election may lead to uncertain career path. I may win or loose the election, I may not win the next election, my political career may wind up in five years or earlier too. But in my opinion that cannot be the sole reason, not to participate in politics.

    First time in our political history, a party is formed which talk about ethics and morality in politics. In the time, when our PM himself has indicated that rights under RTI should be curbed, AAP is demanding political parties should come under ambit of RTI. When reports on criminalisation of politics are not even considered by our parliamentirians, there is a party which cancelled the ticket of a candidate 1 week before the election just because there was a complaint against him in a domestic violence case. Today more than 30% of our representatives have criminal cases against them, it would be odd to expect them to strive for anti-corruption and decriminalisation laws.

    Latest, AAP asked referendum from people if they should take support to form the govt from the party against which it contested. This is something unheard in Indian politics. When regular political parties show reluctance in implementing slightest election reforms, it could be foundation stone of democratic tools like Referendum and Initiatives.

    Two years back I might have rejected all these arguments just as political gimmicks if someone told me these possibilities in politics. But once you start preparing for civil, you realise how much wrong is happening because people of ignorance of people, people are not aware about constitutional provisions. They have eventually accepted that politics is dirty game and it is not their cup of tea. It is absolutely essential that people with good educational background and good intention should come forward to join politics.

    After being an informed person, thanks to civil services preparation, I feel all the more inclined towards the vision of AAP. There are many instances when I noticed what various ARC reports recommends AAP actually has those things in their manifestos. When all other parties want to concentrate power in their hands, AAP argues for decentralization strongly with the concept of Mohalla Samitis. What AAP is doing since last one year and has intension to do further, that’s what an IAS aspirant study as part of ‘what should be done’.

    Being an MP will provide me more say in policy decisions. Scope of influencing society would be larger. Today an MP is practically inaccessible for five years to the people of its constituency once he got elected, he immediately become VIP. This situation has to be changed and for this honest, informed, and people with integrity and ethical principles must come forward. Role of informed youth should not be confined to writing academic articles on shortcomings of govt.

    Delhi has a different demography compare to other states of India. People from all regions, languages, cultures are Delhi voters. Society is not stratified on the basis of caste and religion as rigidly as in other parts of country. It has urban and informed voter. It is relatively easier to set communication link with Delhi voters and make them realise lags in our development process. I understand, contesting election on the ticket of AAP from Delhi in itself is not guarantee of winning an election but one must not forget what Shahrukh Khan says in his latest movie Chennai Express, ‘Don’t underestimate the power of a common man’. One year back, o one could have predicted how politics would be changed.

    AAP has a lot to prove now. It has to be tested how it maintains its high principles in the era of coalition politics, hyper-sensitive media and strongly advert opposition. But considering the track record so far and profiles of its leadership, I would not hesitate to contest Lok Sabha election if given an opportunity. However I have no reluctance in saying that my answer could be different if it is not AAP.

    • Srinu

      3356 words…Great man!

      • Srinu

        ie..1500 words first essay and 1800 second essay!

    • very good one bro…..u mentioned a lot of good nd valid points to back ur arguments….but i wud like to point out one aspect.

      i feel in essay ur first para ie introduction becomes really imp….it tells how ur essay will unfold in coming pages…..i felt ur first three paras were not required. ur 4th para cud have become ur 1 st para “All three are highly admired leaders having different approaches………….”

  • My essay on AAP 🙁
    Non satisfactory attempt but sharing to get good ideas from fellow members 🙂 It is lengthy as I had 1500 words in my mind. I have uselessly incorporated many things because with 4 or 5 points I could’t have written anywhere near 800 words. So bear with me for that 🙂

    My country owes me nothing except it has given me a chance. I was born here, did schooling. learned its essence, its historic,geographic and socio-economic set up. It gave me independence of action and opportunity for service and honor.

    The whole idea of serving my nation zeroes to this particular thought ” there is no greater calling than to serve your fellow men, there is no greater contribution than to help the weak and there is no greater satisfaction than to have done it well .”

    But the perplexing question is to choose the right path ans strategy. Before jumping into the wave of inner conscience and dreams, one should cross check the experiences from segments of life.Both, politics and civil services, in general coincides for the service of the nation and selecting one of them solely depends on one’s personal diligence. One should not conclude that either of them is best and the other is not.

    As inferred, the centric theme is serving the nation and that depends on one’s personal credibility to do justice with the position he/she holds. If a political figure is competent enough in his duty then the morale of serving the nation is justified. The same hold good for any civil servant.

    History is testimony for the fact that many political leaders sacrificed their life in the service of the nation. If one goes by the credentials that they held, definitely the onus of choosing politics is more promising. Not to mention, contemporary scenario has dampened the image of heralded political figures and young generation is a bit apprehensive of taking politics as there first preference.

    I, do not go by prevailing discontent rather I opt for my diligence and conscience. My dream of being an IAS is not prejudiced by rejecting the opportunity of serving the nation through politics. Moreover, it is guided by gradual learning experiences and my upbringing. Before I adjudicate to pursue civil services over political offer, i should enumerate and justify my stand.

    Since my childhood, I was a challenge- loving person. I had little knowledge of politics and civil services. Being a sportsperson, I travelled alot and got to experience the diversity of our nation. The lower middle class people always aspire for a decent job and success is attributed to a well settled life. I was no exception and was on my way to earn PhD. Nothing could have stopped me either if I would not have joined a conference by an NGO, run by my friend. I visited villages, learned the conditions of our people who are in majority and suffering with inhumane treatment.

    I pondered, how could this happen when our government is exercising and mobilizing so many flagship programs in the benefit of such people. Where are the leaders and administration, who are solely accountable to work for them. The prowess of the situation and questions demeaned my perception, of our country being prosperous and pro people. I started learning things and inquiring about the root cause. Minute finding suggested that the consequence is because of lack of administrative machinery and political will.

    The fact that, in politics the clout of party and collective will suppresses the will of an individual irrespective of righteous and honest work one want to do. This is one of the reasons of malfunctioning of our representatives, who could not be firm on their flying promises at the time of election. On contrary, a civil servant has more individual freedom and diverse responsibility to work at grass root level.

    My whole idea of becoming a civil servant is premised upon firm belief that I have to work at grass root level without compromising on my credibility. If I accept any lucrative offer like ticket from Aam Admy Party, my decision making capability will be at stake. Once I decided to work as an administrator, I should not be vulnerable to any offers. Lucrative offers are bound to come and if I am nascent to select them, then I will never be a potent administrator. It may be possible that after selecting one offer, I may fall for other more lucrative offers.

    So, based on my firm determination and decision, I will opt for my dream, not by chance, but with pragmatic approach. A civil servant is surmounted by challenges and responsibilities, has liberty to work for better administration. He is mandated by constitutional authorities and individually responsible for his decision making and responsibilities. I find this work the best as it will give me a chance to widen my horizon of being a competent administrator.

    Being a civil servant, I will mobilize resources, look after the socio-economic conditions of my domain and strive hard to implement the positive changes, needed, especially connecting with masses. Which I seldom would do if I join any political party.

    The rampant corruption, ill-fated societal problems and malfunctioning of administrative machinery will provide me with an opportunity to directly face them and adjudicate supplementary solutions, that would be a bit problematic under political aegis. My inherited honesty and zeal would not be compromised as i would be solely responsible for my decision making and administrative credibility.

    Moreover, an offer from AAP, which itself is in infant stage should not deter me from pursuing my ambition. The sort of response it has got is incredible but it has to pass the test of time. The principles on which their victory is premised will be judged in time to come. However, I will not reject the offer just on the basis of its nascent phase but on the basis of my personal commitments and integrity. The dream for which I lived and strive all the time, will never be compromised just on the premise of any lucrative offers.

    The major problems of our society is convincingly ignored by the higher hierarchy of administrative authority and political parties but as an administrator I may fill the void of contact between common man and administration. The more the connectivity, the more is the problem solving skills, the more problems are solved, the more balanced and inclusive our society will be.

    By sidelining the offer of AAP, I do not demean the qualitative work certain political figures and party does. But I will be more focused and determined to set an example that our administration is competent enough provided the individual holding the position maintains the integrity.

    I am very much connected to the lines ” We cannot live for ourselves alone, our lives are connected by a thousand invisible threads and along these sympathetic fibres, our actions run as causes and return to us as result.”

    • my friend, plz dont call ticket from AAP as lucrative offer —“any lucrative offer like ticket from Aam Admy Party”…… Candidates of AAP have to face 100 times difficult challenges than any other party. Telling u from personal experience as I am observing this party since its origin.

      • Mukul Goyal
        My friend 🙂

        Lucrative offer is just a word to address about fascinating offers, I could guess that u might have personal attachments with AAP. I didn’t reject the idea of working wid AAP or any party. I just addressed what I would opt for 🙂
        I mentioned that, many political figures and party works immensely at grass root level. Though I missed on many fronts but I didn’t want to be parochial any way. So I took a balanced stand 🙂

      • NITIN

        I too agree with ur point…..i think Tauseef bhai…..had mixed traditional way of politics which yes, he can call lucrative offers but forgot the AAP way of politics which is very hard n genuine with sole aim for national Service……..What is lucrative if u r not taking lal batti, no vip culture, no MLA fund…………So i dont agree it is a lucrative offer……..

    • ur base is good…..the lines on which u tried to put ur argument is solid…..the idea of not deviating from ur goal and nascent stage of AAP are really good arguments.
      cheers 😀

      • Thankeww so much Kartik babu..Badhiya hi 🙂

        I learnt so much from u …blessed to have u in my group bro

  • Srinu

    Dear friends..waiting for ur opinion on this essay
    If you are given a ticket to contest Lok Sabha elections by the Aam Aadmi Party from New Delhi, would you contest leaving behind your IAS dream? Give a reasoned explanation.
    Politican and IAS officer both are important for the society. Both can make the changes in the society. Both have an impact on the thousands of lives. It is important to choose between these two based on his aim in life.
    What is my aim in life?
    • To do a job where there is a lot of respect.
    • To utilize my leadership skills
    • Serve the nation with pride
    • Administer the society in a descent way
    • Social upliftment of the poor for the welfare of the society
    Politics vs Beurocracy
    A politician is a person who is involved in influencing public policy and decision making. He is elected by the people. To win in the election, he has to win the confidence of many. It is necessary spend a lot of money. Civil service is the permanent bearocracy of the government of India. Ministers lay down the policy; it is the civil servant to carry out this policy. IAS is one of the three all-india-services. A civil servant is responsible for the law and order and general administration in the area under his work. There are other ways to work for the society like work in an NGO and some charity works like that. But politics and beurocracy has a larger impact on the society. Let me analyse which is the best way to achieve my aims.
    Aim 1: to do a job where there is a lot of respect.
    It cannot be denied that during the recent decades, there has been tremendous erosion in the respect and esteem for parliamentary institutions and the legislators in general. On the other side civil service is increasing its respect every day. Respect comes from being honesty. It is very difficult for a political person to be honest.
    Aim 2: To utilize my leadership skills
    There is no doubt that both the politics and beaurocracy needs leadership skills; but high skills of leadership are required as an executive than as legislator. Making the law requires knowledge while implementing requires leadership.
    Aim 3: Serve the nation with pride
    Right or wrong, the people feel that the breeds of politicians in all parties are generally selfish, power-hungry, greedy, and dishonest. They are so busy in the struggle for power that they have no time or energy left for serving the people. Then where is the pride to serve the nation.
    Aim 4: Administer the society in a descent way
    A society can be better administered by properly implementing the policies. The important function of a civil servant is the implementation of policies framed by the legislature. My purpose here can be served better as an IAS officer than a politician.
    Aim 5: Social upliftment of the poor for the welfare of the society.
    Our nation has so many good policies for the each section of the society. If really implemented well with good will there can be definitely social upliftment of the poor. This can be achieved well as a civil servant than a politician. It is very important that every resident of our country know his/her rights and benefits that they are eligible to; they should also know the ways to get those benefits. As a civil servant, I will make this (awareness) as my first priority.
    From the above point it is clear that my aims can be achieved better as an IAS officer than as a politician. Though I have got a ticket to contest in election form Aam Admi Party (or any other party), I do not accept it at this stage. I pursue my dream of an IAS officer and reach my goals.

    • My dear, Aam Aadmi Party is entirely missing in this essay. Essay is not about choice between IAS and Politician, it is about IAS vs Politician with Aam Aadmi Party tag.

      ” On the other side civil service is increasing its respect every day.” – highly controversial statement

      “high skills of leadership are required as an executive than as legislator” – can’t assume so

  • Mahendra

    I’m just virtually lambasted, after reading such good essays.As sir told that wiki and google will be useless, I just wrote whatever came to my mind, so I can’t even laugh at such naive essays. Although, I will says that all of the essays that you guys posted here,are different from each other, and are properly structured. But, still, they are not perfect and could be improved by the discussions approach that, INSIGHTS is going incorporate in their classes.I’m sure that learning from each other will be really fun in offline classes. And compulsion to read and write daily and champion the exams in 1 year time, will make it such a fierce and healthy competition.40 lucky people are going to get selected, and I’m sure they will be best out of those 130 serious aspirants. Fingers crossed, waiting for results, and best of luck to you all too.

  • rs5000month

    If you are given a ticket to contest Lok Sabha elections by the Aam Aadmi Party from New Delhi, would you contest leaving behind your IAS dream? Give a reasoned explanation.

    If I am given the ticket of Lok Sabha elections by Aam Aadmi party, this is really fascinating prospective. But, if they are giving me ticket to fight Lok Sabha Elections, surely they would see something in me, before giving me ticket. One of the factors which is important for AAP is honesty and integrity of the chosen candidate and if he can work to eliminate corruption in all forms from the country.
    I support the cause, and strongly support the AAP, but winning, the election even if I get ticket is quite, circumstantial. I may win, and I may not win the election. If I win, what will be the benefits to me, what could I do after becoming MP, and most of all, what were the objectives that I choose to become an MP, leaving all my dreams especially IAS.
    Now, these questions are really tricky and can haunt anyone, who wants to do something significant for the society. I’m a kind hearted person, and when I see the problems that our country Is facing right now, it becomes really difficult to choose, what exactly I want. AAP wants to eliminate corruption which is the root cause of maximum of problems that our country is facing. Some of the main problems, which arise due to corruption, are poverty, lack of responsibility, nepotism, favouritism, and delay in completion of projects, lack of quality in public works and most of all neglect of deserving and competent persons on various posts. Government is highest authority, from which all sources of corruption drive power. So, if I’m at source of the government, supposing that I become minister, I can effectively tackle corruption. I can increase employment opportunities, make sure that officers that work under me are working impartially, and if I’m not corrupt, I can make sure that they are also not corrupt and general work goes on without corruption. I can formulate policies, which tackle corruption effectively and in general have a developmental approach.
    But, these are all hypothetical situations, deriving from the fact that what common public wants. Politics is not easy, and people who choose their representatives have their own aspirations and dreams. For, different classes’ different issues are there. Some consider corruption as main issue, but others support class, caste, hierarchy, their own representation and representation of their cause, communal issues etc. A riot affected area, where communal harmony was prevailing and people were living in brotherhood, suddenly becomes totally changed after riots. After such incidents, people start looking themselves as, we are Muslim, and we are Hindu or we are Christian and other community is different from us. In that case they forget, and vote on communal lines. In such cases, AAP is certain to loose, as its aims are very sacrosanct for me, but they are just not influential to make me the representative of the people. People will prefer security and peace, on communal lines and will vote for such political candidates who have polarised the general populace on communal lines.
    Other than this, there are many regional parties, which are doing good development in their respective states. Due to their local governance and regionalism they choose local parties to form state government instead of national government. So, if I get ticket from these areas, then also I’m also not sure that I’ll win or not as I’m just a normal guy who left his IAS dream and went into politics. Due to my preparation of IAS I’m better informed and I understand the social issues, economic issues, land issues, etc. better and I can work, but the problem is to persuade people and make them believe in the cause of AAP and eligibility of yourself. If you are not eligible, you are going to get rejected. . For winning, you will need a lot of money, a well-informed supportive cadre of people who work for you mainly young volunteers and a general movement so that people do believe your cause.
    You, can always return back to pursue your IAS dream, but then the question arises, why you went to politics, when you were not confident of winning? So, if I go to politics, contesting on AAP ticket, then it will depend totally on the above mentioned points.
    Now, let us consider that I reject the proposal of AAP, even though I believe in their cause, and I continue my studies to pursue my dream of becoming an IAS officer. Since, this was my dream from a long time, and I have strong reasons to become an administrative officer, I would like to continue working on the dream and make it possible. One, day I will become IAS, and if AAP forms government then I will have more administrative freedom to work with honest politicians and work for the betterment of the society. I think that, both honest administrators and honest politicians are the need of country right now. AAP will get someone else, to stand, who will work on those lines, and with me becoming IAS I can also assure at-least one more honest officer. Plus, officers work on ground issues, and in fact they execute most of the government schemes. I believe that, fault is not in the government schemes, but it is in the implementation level. So, becoming an IAS allows me to work directly with the day to day problems in the implementation of these schemes and removal of problems arising out of them.
    Also, this service gives me, a sense of pride, peace, satisfaction, and commitment to serve country and people, which I may/may not find in active politics. Also leaving IAS studies will be a tough decision. Again I’ll have to consult my parents, who financed all my studies. They will also have to agree, if I were to enter in active politics, which I don’t think they will allow.
    A lot of funds come directly under district magistrate, which I can utilise effectively with my expertise to generate more employment and eliminate poverty. I can effectively educate people, about their rights; I can make sure that other government institutions are doing their work properly and for the benefit of the people. Law and order is maintained by police and no one is discriminated on basis of caste or community. The general masses love an honest officer, who works effectively and is intelligent and hard working. I have these qualities in me, so I will keep pursing my IAS dream instead of going into politics.
    Lastly, government is our political boss, and we have to work under him, according to the constitution of India. There is clear separation of powers between all wings of the country. If I become IAS, one day I can reach up-to secretary level, and then I can help ministers to formulate the future laws of this country and I’ll be the main advisor on various issues. So, I’ll be equally important to minister who comes to power, with no administrative expertise and is solely dependent on my advice. I’ would have already field work experience, can work better with him. In end he is the chosen representative and he will tell what exactly the people need, and final decisions will be under him, but still I think that, I’ll have a far greater role in shaping the future of my country if I’m an IAS officer rather than a politician.
    Being an IAS I also get handsome salary, challenging job, respect and secure tenure up-to my retirement. And when I’ would have completed my job, I would have defiantly made my own mark by working for the people tirelessly and leading them as expected from me, by the people and constitution of India. Later, after retirement, if I still have high energy levels, and if the time demands I can enter active politics as till then I would have vast administrative experience and popularity among people, by my own achievements during service. These will help me to gather crucial votes that are needed by all candidates. Just, getting tickets from a good party is not enough. I will need to prove myself which I can’t do right now.
    So, after looking at all perspectives and after having a deep introspection, I came to the conclusion that I should reject AAP proposal for MP ticket, and continue my studies to materialise my IAS dream.

    • I may win, and I may not win the election – Good point this.
      Just one suggestion — adding this would’ve made your point even better – If you contest, your fate is in people’s hands but if you pursue your dream, it is 100% in your hands 🙂

      • Mahendra

        Tons of thanks Prashanth for your valuable suggestion, really appreciated. Please be more critical, and draw all the negative points, which should not be written. This will always help me a lot to make my work finer, as I’m a fast learner.

        • You are welcome..
          Ok let me review a bit more. From UPSC point of view, your essay shows that you are pro AAP or atleast too optimistic about AAP where you could’ve been diplomatic :-). Eg: Sentences like ‘One, day I will become IAS, and if AAP forms government then I will have more administrative freedom to work with honest politicians’ – This honest politicians part, we cannot guarantee 🙂
          Again from UPSC point of view one more sentence ‘and with me becoming IAS I can also assure at-least one more honest officer’, You said ‘at least’ which looks to me as if there is a scarcity of Honest officers. Better to write things like these without any influence and Honesty as a prerequisite 🙂
          Finally what I can say is you were being honest in writing. Also, Vinay sir clearly pointed out above that “Your views should be honest and straightforward, not to impress readers/examiners”, so if there are certain marks assigned for honesty, I guess you will get them. Once again this is just my opinion 🙂

          All the best!

          • NITIN

            Prashanth Bhai ……..please also review my essay……

          • Mahendra

            ahhh, 😀 Thanks a lot, these points matter a lot between selection and rejection. From now, I won’t personalize, and will try to generalize my essays. These things are what we need to learn from each other. Criticizing others gives you more broad view, and more points, than you have and getting criticism develops your approach to refine your work. So, thanks again Prashanth. Nitin, I’m doing review for you, please you also write something against mine essays, points should differ from Prashanth.

  • rs5000month

    Nehru vs Patel vs Gandhi – Who is best suited for becoming PM if they are alive today

    We live in beautiful country of India, which is 7th largest country and biggest democracy in the world. India is quite big, and at same time, it constitutes very diverse people, who differ in language, customs, religion, traditions, ethnicity, dress, food etc. But, still we live in peace and harmony with each other and follow diplomatically formed governments.
    But 65 years back, we were not free. We were colonies of the British Empire. The British came to India as normal traders. But, soon they started getting involved in local feuds of the indigenous people. Due, to lack of unity, and internal feuds between local rulers, our country step by step came under their rule. In fact, there was no India as a whole prior to that. British people did not come here to settle. They started exploiting our economy for the benefit of their motherland. Our country was made a raw material producer and importer of finished goods from the factories in Britain. Local industries were destroyed by a series of measures, strictly aiming at their destruction. British rule was for the benefit of rulers who had no interest in the development of India. Due to this neglect, India became very backward in every field. Local industries suffered a lot. Agriculture, education, health conditions became worse. These factors, combined with discontent among local rulers over Doctrine of Lapse policy, and discontent among Indian sepoy’s of British army in India resulted in 1857 First war of Independence.
    But, the revolt was easily suppressed, and condition again became similar prior to 1857. So, in 1885 INC was formed to peacefully put the Indian concerns over these matters in front of British Government. But, with passing time, INC went through a lot of changes. It became the national front to oppose the government on various issues. INC constituted great leaders like Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru and Sardar Patel. These popular leaders led to freedom of our Nation. The characteristics and personalities of these 3 people are entirely different. These 3 had very different ideologies and perspectives, about how the country should be governed.
    Mahatma Gandhi started his carrier as a barrister and he successfully campaigned, mass movements in South Africa. He returned to India in 1915 and joined INC. After that he, led many mass movements in India. His ideology was truth and ahimsa. Gandhi wanted that country should evolve tolerance and empathy towards whole world in general and weaker sections in particular. He was biggest advocator of devolution of powers to the local levels. He wanted that every village should be self-sufficient in its basic needs of clothing, food, and residence. Local people should take decisions on their life by themselves. They should produce, the food, clothes in their own villages. He was staunchly opposed to any war or violent activity.
    The popular movements which led to our countries freedom were all unique in nature. They were all non-violent movements, which incorporated, peaceful means of opposition that included dharna, fasts, hartals, non-cooperation etc. His ideology was that if something is unjust common people should protest against it diplomatically and should get to a peaceful solution rather than fighting armed revolution. He was opposed to the bifurcation of country into India and Pakistan. He was secular, and was having empathy and tolerance towards all groups of society. He fought for the cause of downtrodden groups of our society whom he gave name “harizans”, meaning people of god.
    If Mahatma Gandhi were to rule today, he would like to make India a non-violent soft power. India fought 3 wars with Pakistan and 1 war with china. Our country is still following the principle of no attack on any other country and retaliation only in case of self-defence. But an idealistic approach or too much adherence to a particular ideology is harmful for the country. We can’t get ruled by Gandhian approach in present context when our country is facing a lot of problems , in the form of extremism, terrorist operations, violent secessions demands, and constant danger from neighbouring countries of a possible war due to these issues. So, remaining ideal and having no military or nuclear capability, would harm our countries interests in contemporary world.
    Pandit Nehru was moderate in his thoughts and behaviour. He was a secular person, who ruled our country as Prime Minister for a long time. He successfully led 3 popular democratic governments of congress. Our countries economic and social policy and the path of development that we followed, were all lead by him. He was a very intelligent person, who gave beautiful speeches. He was popular among the common masses. People loved him, and small children called him Chacha Nehru. He was a founder member of NAM. In his leadership many congress sessions were held.
    He was also ideological and assumed many things as idealistic. His was not far sighted as apparent from his decisions regarding china. He was not able to diplomatically solve the border issues with China which resulted in 1962 war, in which our country faced a humiliating defeat. NAM also became irrelevant as our country had to look for help from America and Britain during Chinese invasion. Soviet Republic remained neutral during this war, due to our clear policy of non-alignment. This incident showed that you can’t remain neutral, if you are a stakeholder in regional balancing of powers.
    Socialistic approach that our country accepted under his leadership was also not able to produce the results as were planned in our planning. A lot of people remained poor and backward despite the planning adopted for them. Nehru was having a strong central tendency and wanted authoritative rule. He was not pragmatic, and considered issues emotionally rather than in practical manner. His emphasis that Prime Minister should have greater powers than the rest of his Cabinet and he being their supreme leader and sole decision maker, was harmful for a democratic setup. If asked to govern India now, he would be a failure, since, when he ruled congress was having a absolute majority, and a clear mandate. But, to run government now, you need coalition governments and a more diplomatic setup in which you will have to hear the voices of all classes and regional aspirations before taking strong decisions.
    Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel was the third eminent personality and freedom fighter. He was Cabinet home minister. He is called iron man of India. Patel was very strong leader. He started his carrier as a barrister. He came in active politics by contesting the local elections of Municipal Corporation of Ahmedabad. There, he remained chairman of the Corporation for several years and worked very well. Later, he came to know Gandhi and was deeply inspired by this actions and thoughts. He became a disciple of Gandhi, and led many mass movements in Bardaoli, and other districts of Gujarat as instructed by Gandhi. He was a practical person. He believed in democratic setups, and always used to call meetings and take important decisions. Thus his decisions always had the support of maximum stakeholders.
    He united India, by his tactical and diplomatic approach. The success of his achievements can be gauged from the fact that, many princely states, which wanted to remain independent or to join Pakistan, gradually became part of India. Today, the present shape of our country is due to the efforts of Sardar Patel. He was also opposed to partition, but being pragmatic, when he saw that separation was inevitable for the peace and security, he supported the partition. He was instrumental in forming the Administrative Services, as according to him, these were vital for the unity of the country. He also wanted democratic setup in the cabinet and was of the favour that Prime Minister is also a part of Cabinet and all important decisions should be taken diplomatically and not authoritatively by Prime Minister. He was quick to act and was very good administrator. He successfully, handled riots and communal violence, with the limited resources at his hand. He provided comfort and shelter to aggrieved Muslim families.
    In present context, Sardar Patel is best suited to become Prime Minister of the country. He is practical in his approach towards the problems that our country faces today. He would be perfect to take apt action on issues of regionalism, terrorism, separatism, turbulent neighbours and international relations etc. If he was alive and was our Prime Minister, then I believe that he could have easily solved the regional matters, and would have taken care of regional aspirations while keeping strong centre intact. His diplomatic approach of having meetings on important issues is highly appraised and is the need of present hour where politics has become dynastical and quite authoritative in nature.
    So, in end I would like to conclude that all three leaders Nehru, Gandhi and Patel were unique and were totally different from each other. They were all great leaders, but, if these 3 were alive today, then Patel is best suited among equals to govern our nation.

  • nikhilesh

    sir , I have sent my both essays before 04.00 p.m on 18 th itself. please confirm the receipt of my essays.

  • RAJ

    Could You please post the best 10 essays ?? in pdf or word format please.